BottledDog

Uh oh. Absolutely disgusting the latest attacks on Simpson today. Unrepeatable and simply unfarking believable.

Squirm.

Well at least that knocks on the head the ludicrous theory some still trot out, that Pardews appointment was in part down to Hughtons greater reluctance toward any deal for Carroll. huh? the rumour, as you called it, was actually that pardew was brought in as ashley thought it would make it easier to flog players, specifically the higher earners, to reduce the wage bill and make the club more attractive to buyers in the future. this was a "rumour" that came from golfmag when he mentioned that pardew was being lined up weeks before the media got a sniff of anything going on. hughton's comments don't have the slightest bearing on whether or not there was any truth to that. huh? I niether called it a "rumour", nor was I in any way referring to any of Golfmags 'revelations'. I was in fact simply harking back to a number of people who said at the time of Carrollgate that Pardew was in no small part brought in to dance like a puppet and go along with his sale, as opposed to Hughton who'd have kicked up a stink. Now that Hughton, as with every other commentator it seems, has said he'd also have sold him, that theory has indeed been shown to be bollocks. fair enough, for some reason i typed out rumour when i meant to write theory. semantics aside, this "theory" as i should've said, comes directly from golfmag's statement that pardew's been brought in for that kind of reason. nothing hughton has said has any bearing on that. what matters is whether or not ashley thought, at the time, that getting pardew in would make selling players easier (whether or not that, in reality, is true). think i'll trust golfmag's source on that issue, after all, he nailed the hughton-pardew change weeks before anyone else had a clue. Not wishing to get into a pointless arguement, but the idea that Pardew was brought in as he would be more of a pushover when it comes to players sales (Carrols in particular) was not simply one originating directly from Golfmag, but was/is a pretty standard reaction when there are rumours of players being sold left right and centre. Hughton, in discussing Carroll (and what we should expect over coming seasons) has severely undermined that arguement, if not felled it in isolation. I have no idea what it does to your and Golfmags wider conspiracy.

Well at least that knocks on the head the ludicrous theory some still trot out, that Pardews appointment was in part down to Hughtons greater reluctance toward any deal for Carroll. huh? the rumour, as you called it, was actually that pardew was brought in as ashley thought it would make it easier to flog players, specifically the higher earners, to reduce the wage bill and make the club more attractive to buyers in the future. this was a "rumour" that came from golfmag when he mentioned that pardew was being lined up weeks before the media got a sniff of anything going on. hughton's comments don't have the slightest bearing on whether or not there was any truth to that. huh? I niether called it a "rumour", nor was I in any way referring to any of Golfmags 'revelations'. I was in fact simply harking back to a number of people who said at the time of Carrollgate that Pardew was in no small part brought in to dance like a puppet and go along with his sale, as opposed to Hughton who'd have kicked up a stink. Now that Hughton, as with every other commentator it seems, has said he'd also have sold him, that theory has indeed been shown to be bollocks.

Well at least that knocks on the head the ludicrous theory some still trot out, that Pardews appointment was in part down to Hughtons greater reluctance toward any deal for Carroll.

Fair enough. Good to hear.

Says exactly what needed to be said.

Sorry, I thought you were just a simpleton. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YpKgmE2pNGw/Sdlt2C7kJaI/AAAAAAAAAJY/m2Uk6TfVd0o/s400/irony+meter.jpg

Bwaahhahahaha.

I think everybody would turn greedy tbh. Thinking about it, most of us would probably say they'd be fine with £5k a week as long as they got to play for Newcastle. But now, if the situation was different and you'd be playing for some random club, you'd look at other people's wages and go "I want more, I'm talented enough to warrant more. I don't necessarily need more, but I still want more." and etc. I'm probably just ranting, but still. I seem to recall Van Nistelroy (sp?) saying the wages he got at Man U were ridiculous... Luque was quoted recently as saying exactly the same about his pay at Newcastle. For him it was the only reason he came to us, and I doubt he is alone in that.

You are missing the point. We have the money to satisfy arguably more important players such as HBA and Tiote, so the wages are unlikely to be the stumbling block here. But what happens when they want more money? We just let them go? Sell them for a 'tidy profit'. Well, if they've done their jobs, by that stage we'll be in position to offer the wages only a team consistantly challenging in Europe can.

You are missing the point. We have the money to satisfy arguably more important players such as HBA and Tiote, so the wages are unlikely to be the stumbling block here.

Ner Can't see what it has to do with Toontastic anyway to be fair, if anyone wanted to be drawn into an actual dialog with the bloke about Simpsons use of 'Utd' (ffs ), they'd take it up on Twitter.

Having a decent set of full backs can make a lot of difference to a side. Especially one that can defend and attack like Jose. Agreed, but would you rate him in a higher wage bracket than either Tiote or HBA?

100% spot on. Yeah but... all that money. Mmm, money. They might want to sell, but that's hardly a reason not to want to get him signed up to a new contract. Shit, that's why Enrique won't sign a contract. If he signs then we'll try and sell him even more actively, so by not signing he is showing his desire to stay! /'bout as logical and evidence based as most of this thread.

Probably somewhere around 68%.

What else could it be about, in your opinion? A said earlier in the thread I think a major concern, if not the biggest concern if I were Enrique at this stage of his career, is not even getting a hint of recognition by the selectors for the Spaninsh national team. There is clearly an implied bias towards players playing in Spain or a few big name clubs in England including Liverpool. I fear the same concerns will be rearing up for Colo sooner rather than later too.

Not getting a even a hint of recognition by the selectors for the Spaninsh national team would be high, if not top of the list if I were him. Whether true or not, there is clearly an implied bias towards players playing in Spain or a few big name clubs in England including Liverpool.

his contract is running out, which provides the justification This. I'd imagine every single one of us wan't him to stay, but if he doesn't sign a new contract then it's a simple choice, sell in the summer or see him tie up a pre-contract agreement with someone else in the winter. Can't see anything 'pathetic' in recognising that or looking for the odd silver linings if he didn't stick with us.

Bit harsh if that's the general view. No idea what he's like about town but comes accross as a really good lad in his interviews, just young and flakey.

Just caught his post match interview on .co.uk - It's really difficult to work out if anything is taken on board. God knows how he is in training, frustrating, but no doubt got something about him.....but then the caravan park in Wales....fish farm and the fuzzy shoes....and it's all like.....ooooooh....shiny! Come on son, love you, but....FOCUS.

Skyscraper City.

All thing considered I'm pretty happy with that. COOOOOOMOOON!

WHA WHA WHAAAAAAT?!?!!?